Intention to prosecute

[DaveNewcastle]

I would prefer this not go to court. If it did with full certainty i will be hiring a solicitor. My question is do i need one now?

I hoped that I had answered that in post #9.

No.

Wait until you receive any letter from the Company. Only then will you know whether the person investigating your incident has accepted your explanation that you commonly use an abbreviated name (in which case thy'll simply be asking you to pay the fare and probably a small administrative fee, or whether they do not believe your explanation and that they suspect you of intentionally giving a false name and address. Only then will you know whether a solicitor specialising in Criminal Defence work will be able to help.



This doesn't seem to be relevant to your request:-

That and trying to give the impression that Mr Smith is actually just down the road from you..!

 

[Mark_H]

Thanks all for the advise.

When i was asked for my full name i gave it. The inspector wrote that initially i gave my abbreviated name as thats what im known as. Can i restate the inspector never showed me any id. I know that some of you are stressing that he is an official, fair enough, but any official needs to show id than i would have automatically registered the severity of the issue and treated him asking me for my details with more seriousness, and more than likely given him my full name straight away.

Ive used that name for years and have evidence of it.

My surname is foreign an is extremely long.

I would prefer this not go to court. If it did with full certainty i will be hiring a solicitor. My question is do i need one now?

There's no requirement in UK law to use an "official" name - you can call yourself whatever you want, so long as you do not do so to deceive. If the hypothetical "J Alex" is what also appears on your gas bill, credit cards, etc etc, and you can be identified at your given address using it, then (in my not-a-lawyer opinion) that's not deceptive.

I'm familiar with a few people who adopt completely different names to their "birth" names because your average Brit just mispronounces them shamelessly, and this is both reasonable and entirely legal.

Consider that Mrs Smith-Jones (nee Smith), when divorcing Mr Jones, doesn't need to change her name by deed poll to revert to Mrs Smith, she just goes ahead and does it. (Or more amusingly, consider the actions of a certain Mr Saxe-Coburg in 1917)

On the ID side, he was obliged to show you appropriate ID on request, but if you didn't ask, he didn't have to.

I hope that your concern about the name issue proves to be misplaced, and you simply get the failure to hold a ticket. As others have said, you can only wait and see.

 

[Clip]

The OP said he had 20 minutes until his plane gate closed.

This suggests he was at / his rail journey destination was at an airport.

Oyster can be used for LHR and LCY so this would suggest he was at either STN or LTN or LGW or SEN though of course he could have been further afield.

I wonder whether or not the Investigating Officer would accept that a belief that an oyster card could be used for travel to one of these destinations would be a "genuine mistake".

I believe the OP has already stated he was on a train to Gatwick.

 

[Unfair12]

Its deceitful if you are asked to give your full name and you insist its that. But i gave my full name as soon as i was asked.

Im not trying to get out of paying my fare, im more than happy to pay i pay very other day that im using public transport. Just this day i used my oyster card on the wrong zone. Im dyslexic i dont understand zones never have. I thought gatwick was in Lindon and that it would be fine to use my oyster i made a big mistake by assuming. Ive definitely learnt my lesson.

 

[Clip]

Its deceitful if you are asked to give your full name and you insist its that. But i gave my full name as soon as i was asked.
Im not trying to get out of paying my fare, im more than happy to pay i pay very other day that im using public transport. Just this day i used my oyster card on the wrong zone. Im dyslexic i dont understand zones never have. I thought gatwick was in Lindon and that it would be fine to use my oyster i made a big mistake by assuming. Ive definitely learnt my lesson.

I do understand that but officially you must give your full name as this is what they will check up on should they make a call to verify your details - which, after giving your name he asked if it was your real name to which you changed it to your real name.

Your intentions may have been honest and we have no reason to doubt you but from an inspectors point of view they here this all the time from people who do think they will get away with it so they do, in my opinion, have to ensure they treat everyone the same.

As others have said, maybe the prosecutions department will take the view that you just abbreviated it because you have such a long name and will just let you pay the PF .. Who knows until the letter arrives.

 

[Unfair12]

No he did not make a phonecall. I gave it right at the beginning. By the time he made a 'phone call' he had the correct full name
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also I received a letter with the intention to prosecute

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . Also I received a letter with the intention to prosecute

That's what we need to know about to give you appropriate advice.

What does it say?
Does it specify your alledged offence?
Does it ask you to provide any information?
Does it mention a cost that the Company wants to recover, or the amount of the penalty fare?
Does it refer to your abbreviated name or to a false name?

 

[Unfair12]

Hi Dave

It's Says Notice of prosecution to prosecute

And that I must reply to the letter in 21 days

My alleged offence

Giving a false name

Entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket entitling travel

It's asking me for a response. I'm scared I might write something that will make the situation worse.

 

[maniacmartin]

Does it say under what legislation they are considering prosecuting under?

 

[martybabes]

I do understand that but officially you must give your full name as this is what they will check up on should they make a call to verify your details

You need only give your full name if you are asked for your full name. There is a world of difference between the name that you commonly use and your full name. To get the right answer you must first ask the right question.

 

[Unfair12]

it does not say under which act they intend to prosecute
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
i have written a letter that i intend to send them asap. I just want this whole situation to be over. One little mistake has resulted in endless stress.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
do i need to state that i accept no criminal liability if i am writing a letter to try and settle out of court?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I have advised twice already in this thread that when you receive a letter from the Company about the incident then you should : check it to see if they have accepted your explanation that your "abbreviated name" is not a false name, and that if they do not, then and only then, you would contact a Criminal Defence lawyer.

It appears that the Company has sent you that letter and they did not accept your explanation. But instead of contacting a lawyer you are writing your own letter and asking us for help with that. It's okay that you don't want to ask a lawyer, but it's difficult giving advice to people who don't follow it. I will give you my advice again in the hope that you take it this time.

If what you have told us on here about your abbreviated name is exactly true and is the whole truth, and if you can provide documentation to demonstrate that you regularly use your abbreviated name in official correspondence, then: Write back to the Company explaining that you did not give a false name and provide them with your evidence including copies of correpondence to you at your current address in that name.

If that is true, then there is no "criminal liability" and there is nothing to settle out of court, just the unpaid Penalty Fare.
If all of that is not all true, then you really should contact a Criminal Defence Lawyer.

If you can write a letter which explains all that and also makes an offer to pay the Penalty Fare which is still unpaid, then what else is there to say? You could even enclose a cheque for the Penalty Fare with your reply.

If you don't feel confident in writing that letter, then you really should ask a professional to do it for you - even the Citizen's Advice bureau might be able to help if its just to explain about your name.

Does it say under what legislation they are considering prosecuting under?

I'm assuming that they will be considering S.5.3 (c) of the Regulation of Railways Act:

5.3 If any person:
(c) Having failed to pay his fare, gives in reply to a request by an officer of a railway company a false name or address,​

 

[Unfair12]

hi Dave,

it is true i have it on my email as my address and social media. legally i cannot use it on bank, passport etc. but for everyday stuff i use it.

 

[455driver]

Can i restate the inspector never showed me any id.

Did you ask him to show you any ID?
If you had reason to believe he might not have been genuine then it is up to you to ask him to prove his ID.

You seem be to hung up on this as if it is some sort of golden nugget where as it makes absolutely no difference to anything.

 

[maniacmartin]

An email address and social media don't really count. I have "maniacmartin" on my twitter, but I wouldn't give that as my name. If you had it on say a utility bill or similar it might hold more weight.

 

[Unfair12]

no you wont be able to use it on any utility bill.

you have to give your full name.

anyway when i was asked for my full name i gave it. thus its irrelevant as i was not under any caution or threat to give it, i was just stupid enough to not know the severity of the issue and did not know my full name was required. i never lied. i never gave a complete utter fake name and address. I might just leave this all to a solicitor because its more stress than i can handle.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
guys my case is unique i avoid giving my full name to people for a reason. if i change my name to what i use as my abbreviated surname then that would defy the very reason why i am cautious of giving my full name out.

 

[maniacmartin]

It's quite hard to give good advice given that we do not know what this reason is.

 

[Unfair12]

yes sorry about that. its not suitable to go into detail about it on here.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . its not suitable to go into detail about it on here.

Yes, I understand that.
And I understand everything else you have said.

If you re-read my posts on here, then you'll see that there is only one thing that remains in the light of all that you have said: it is my advice to take professional assistance.

Please take that advice. A Criminal Defence solicitor at a local law firm will understand exactly how to reply to that letter. They will want to look at your ID and the other documentation which confirms the two variants of your name that you use. They may want to take a sworn statement from you to clarify the use of those names. They can help.

Take my advice and do not try to reply to that letter yourself. I don't know why I keep telling you this but I will. You need professional assistance and if there is a reason for not instructing a solicitor then go to the Citizens Advice Bureau tomorrow.

 

[Unfair12]

Hi Dave,

I understand what you have said. But honestly i have nothing to hide. If this goes to court i can prove everything i have said. If the toc want to prosecute me after they have read my letter then i take comfort in knowing that i have not lied. If i am sent a summons then i most definitely will hire a lawyer, to defend me in court.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I will let you know the outcome.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . If i am sent a summons then i most definitely will hire a lawyer, to defend me in court.

Perhaps you don't understand me.

You need legal assistance now, to help you in preventing this from going to Court. If you don't (if you try to send the letter yourself or if you take amateur opinions elsewhere) then it WILL go to Court, and then the costs will be higher, so it will be worse for you

For the fourth time: TAKE PROFESSIONAL ADVICE NOW.

 

[Unfair12]

Thanks Dave. You seem adamant so i will.

 

[FenMan]

I can see where this is heading.

Many people with a Greek, South American and Indian background have long names that they shorten for everyday use - no doubt there are other cultures that do the same. In many Chinese-based cultures people have alternative westernised names that bear no relation to their given name in Chinese.

This may not square too well with an RPI in the UK when they request personal details from a passenger.

Which makes me wonder what training TOCs offer their RPIs for this circumstance, if any?

 

[jon0844]

All that matters is that this person is known and traceable by that name. If so, no problem.

 

[Unfair12]

Yes it is difficult to get people to spell my name. No one can spell it first time around.

I think people should be given the benefit of the doubt if they give shortened names. Its still their name. In my case i was asked i need to provide my full name so i did. I dont understand how its escalated so much.

 

[Mark_H]

Yes it is difficult to get people to spell my name. No one can spell it first time around.

I think people should be given the benefit of the doubt if they give shortened names. Its still their name. In my case i was asked i need to provide my full name so i did. I dont understand how its escalated so much.

I find this entirely understandable, but....you have now encountered someone who apparently doesn't understand it, which is placing you in a potentially very serious situation, fair or unfair.

Please take the advice of DaveNewcastle.

 

[martybabes]

Hi Dave

It's Says Notice of prosecution to prosecute

And that I must reply to the letter in 21 days

My alleged offence

Giving a false name

Well, the prosecution case falls down right here - he gave his real name not a false one. If they wanted to prosecute for some other name-related offence, then that is what they should say. Sloppy work will get them nowhere.

 

[bb21]

Well, the prosecution case falls down right here - he gave his real name not a false one. If they wanted to prosecute for some other name-related offence, then that is what they should say. Sloppy work will get them nowhere.

The names don't match, so you are sure that he would win because ...?

 

[martybabes]

But he gave his name - it wasn't a false one. It may have been an abbreviated name but it wasn't false.

And what was it supposed to match?

If he had been asked to give his full name but didn't, that's what he should be charged with. But that's not what he has been charged with!!!

 

[bb21]

And what was it supposed to match?

His surname.

We'll have to agree to disagree.